BoA CLI decline reasons; review process/best time to request

[lowspender]

Since getting a cli 100 days ago, I've been overly focused on waiting for my next cli. BoA cruelly tempts me with the luv button.. EVERY DAY! At least, the 2 weeks following my cli a few months ago (had to check each morning to be sure it was real). I log in 3x+ weekly, it's always been there, the 15 mo's since acct opened. 

Including when I was pumped during a mid-afternoon workout, knowing full well I needed to wait 91 days. Said outloud.. ymmv!  and hit luv, just 58 days after my last approval.

Declined, no surprise. Button back the following morning? Yup! Possibly in part bc my profile justifies a much higher limit, if my file weren't so thin. Or just to counter their normal trend and drive me nuts. 

Wanted to post my denial reasons (other than not waiting 91 days), to see if I'm safe to proceed next week, or if one is credit related that would reset my 91 day clock (applying too early doesn't reset the clock, I've read here, where credit related denials do).

-Current or past deliquency, derogatory public record(s)

-Current or past delinquency with one or more of your creditors

-Number of accounts, paid as agreed, is too low, or you've missed payments recently

-Your credit references have not been established for a sufficient length of time. 

No derogs, delinquencies past or present, no missed payments ever, got the references line previously with acct having < 12 months history, not since then.

Usually most of these reasons are tossed, when the mistake is user error- same here?

Are cli requests submitted after hours or on weekends treated differently than those during weekly business hours? For boa in particular, but also in general. Are strong profiles treated the same way, regardless of time of day? Could see a late night or weekend submission sent to manual review and approved the next business day. Maybe that's more likely for weaker profiles?

Can you ask for too much, to the point that they either don't counter you, or it's sent to review, noted on your account and held against you in the future? Is there a best or worst time for a request? Assuming no for most of that, but can't help but wonder.

[CreditMarathoner]

---

@lowspender wrote:

No derogs, delinquencies past or present, no missed payments ever, got the references line previously with acct having < 12 months history, not since then.

Usually most of these reasons are tossed, when the mistake is user error- same here?

They're required to list 3 reasons, in order from most significant to least, so if there was really only one reason (asking too soon), the remaining reasons are probably way down the list below the denial threshold.  I think the way it works is the computer has a list of all the possible denial reasons, and a score is calculated for each one based on your credit report and history with them, and if the total score exceeds a threshold, the request is denied and the 3 "highest-scoring" reasons are listed, even if it's 99%, 0.8%, 0.2%.

---

@lowspender wrote:

Are cli requests submitted after hours or on weekends treated differently than those during weekly business hours? For boa in particular, but also in general. Are strong profiles treated the same way, regardless of time of day? Could see a late night or weekend submission sent to manual review and approved the next business day. Maybe that's more likely for weaker profiles?

Can you ask for too much, to the point that they either don't counter you, or it's sent to review, noted on your account and held against you in the future? Is there a best or worst time for a request? Assuming no for most of that, but can't help but wonder.

---

When you submit a request, the computer soft pulls your report, reviews your history and info and makes a decision.  It may grant you the CLI immediately, grant you a lesser amount immediately (counter-offer), flag it for manual review (we'll get back to you in X days), or deny immediately.  All this happens automatically so it doesn't matter what day or time you do it.  If it goes to review, it will be looked at (presumably) by a human during business hours, and you'll hear back once a decision is made, by email and by letter.

AFAIK, this decision isn't based on how much you ask for.  So, if your limit is $5,000 and you ask for $50,000 and it goes to review or is denied, the same thing would have happened if you asked for $5,100.  The computer (or human reviewer) will determine what they're willing to give you, if anything, and will give you that amount, or less if that's what you asked for.

You also can't ask for too much.  If they don't want to give you what you asked for, they will always counter-offer if they're going to give you anything at all.  It's not uncommon for someone to put some pie-in-the-sky amount in they know they'll never get just to get the maximum CLI they'll offer.

One more tidbit:  If you request a CLI and they counter-offer with a lesser amount, you'll get a letter that has the reason they counter-offered, usually something like "The amount of credit extended to you by us and/or our affiliates meets or exceeds our maximums".  Since it's not a denial, they only list 1 reason, not 3.

[lowspender]

---

@CreditMarathoner wrote: They're required to list 3 reasons, in order from most significant to least, so if there was really only one reason (asking too soon), the remaining reasons are probably way down the list below the denial threshold.  I think the way it works is the computer has a list of all the possible denial reasons, and a score is calculated for each one based on your credit report and history with them, and if the total score exceeds a threshold, the request is denied and the 3 "highest-scoring" reasons are listed, even if it's 99%, 0.8%, 0.2%. 

 Required to list 3, like part of the Fair credit reporting act or a similar regulation? Interesting. They have to weigh factors, of course.. reminder for me though when I see that without a number next to it.. could be 1% relevant. Is there a reason code that would explicitly say that it was requested too soon? Or is that not one of the official reasons they can list. That's my main concern, whether they are just throwing things at the wall, or if it's a bad sign in some other way.

---

@CreditMarathoner wrote: The computer (or human reviewer) will determine what they're willing to give you, if anything, and will give you that amount, or less if that's what you asked for.

You also can't ask for too much.  If they don't want to give you what you asked for, they will always counter-offer if they're going to give you anything at all.  It's not uncommon for someone to put some pie-in-the-sky amount in they know they'll never get just to get the maximum CLI they'll offer.

---

The review process seems similar to how I thought, thanks. I keep picturing credit profiles testing the institutions lending boundaries, yet so independent of oversight. Of course, anything near the line brings in a person, so, really not crazy.

The human element here is what I'm more interested in- do analysts expect that knowledge of the BoA counter-offer system leads to.. wild requests? To the point that they could expect you to put a sky high amount? That sets up a whole poker-like series of thought and seems.. unlikely, as a base for sound decisions. E.g.. asking for a small increase could be seen as a sign of low confidence, asking for a generous amount could be expected, asking for the moon could be justified or completely without merit.

While I'm almost certain that is not the system.. is there no human element coming into play, when an analysts sees a request for 250k on a profile with a low income and constant high monthly util on a $2500 card? Can the analyst alter/lower the maximum BoA is willing to offer, if they were inclined to, after reviewing a profile? "This guy is nuts, we can offer another $1000 but I'm only approving $200." Think we would read about this if it were the case, so while I'm sure the human element is also be under very tight guidelines, wonder if it's truly impossible for initial impression or bias to play any role.

[coldfusion]

---

@lowspender wrote:

---

@CreditMarathoner wrote: They're required to list 3 reasons, in order from most significant to least, so if there was really only one reason (asking too soon), the remaining reasons are probably way down the list below the denial threshold.  I think the way it works is the computer has a list of all the possible denial reasons, and a score is calculated for each one based on your credit report and history with them, and if the total score exceeds a threshold, the request is denied and the 3 "highest-scoring" reasons are listed, even if it's 99%, 0.8%, 0.2%. 

 Required to list 3, like part of the Fair credit reporting act or a similar regulation? Interesting. They have to weigh factors, of course.. reminder for me though when I see that without a number next to it.. could be 1% relevant. Is there a reason code that would explicitly say that it was requested too soon? Or is that not one of the official reasons they can list. That's my main concern, whether they are just throwing things at the wall, or if it's a bad sign in some other way.

They can list anywhere from 1 to 4 principal reasons for a denial since that is an adverse action, in order of most to least impactful, but they are only legally obligated to list 1 reason.

---

@CreditMarathoner wrote: The computer (or human reviewer) will determine what they're willing to give you, if anything, and will give you that amount, or less if that's what you asked for.

You also can't ask for too much.  If they don't want to give you what you asked for, they will always counter-offer if they're going to give you anything at all.  It's not uncommon for someone to put some pie-in-the-sky amount in they know they'll never get just to get the maximum CLI they'll offer.

---

The review process seems similar to how I thought, thanks. I keep picturing credit profiles testing the institutions lending boundaries, yet so independent of oversight. Of course, anything near the line brings in a person, so, really not crazy.

The human element here is what I'm more interested in- do analysts expect that knowledge of the BoA counter-offer system leads to.. wild requests? To the point that they could expect you to put a sky high amount? That sets up a whole poker-like series of thought and seems.. unlikely, as a base for sound decisions. E.g.. asking for a small increase could be seen as a sign of low confidence, asking for a generous amount could be expected, asking for the moon could be justified or completely without merit.

While I'm almost certain that is not the system.. is there no human element coming into play, when an analysts sees a request for 250k on a profile with a low income and constant high monthly util on a $2500 card? Can the analyst alter/lower the maximum BoA is willing to offer, if they were inclined to, after reviewing a profile? "This guy is nuts, we can offer another $1000 but I'm only approving $200." Think we would read about this if it were the case, so while I'm sure the human element is also be under very tight guidelines, wonder if it's truly impossible for initial impression or bias to play any role.

---

Inline comment made above in red.

BoA is known to occasionally manually override an autogenerated approval for a card where the bank sends a "we goofed, you shouldn't have been approved" letter, so no reason to think that they didn't have the authority to justifiably override a CLI approval although I've never heard of them doing it.